View
11
Download
1
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
A REPORT ON A NATIVE TITLE
CLAIM BY KEVIN LANCE (TIBBY)
QUALL ON BEHALF OF THE
DANGGALABA CLAN
Above: Gapuk (smoking/burning rag/cleansing) ceremony for the
late Nipper Rankin held at Kulaluk in Darwin on May 6, 1989
(see McConvell 1989; Tennant 1983).
Report by
William Bartlett Day PhD
Consulting Anthropologist
Darwin
Northern Territory
November 2010
i
ii
Author’s experience
I graduated from The University of Western Australia in 2001 with a Doctorate of
Philosophy (PhD) in anthropology. Previously, I was a resident in Darwin from May
1969 to June 1985 during which time I assisted the Larrakia people and others in
researching and publicising their land claims. From August 1996 to February 1998 I
conducted field work in Darwin for my PhD thesis, Fringe dwellers in Darwin: cultural
persistence or a culture of resistance? From 2001 to 2003 I was employed by the
Pilbara Native Title Service in Tom Price, Western Australia, preparing connection
reports and genealogies for various Pilbara native title claimant groups and from 2003
to 2006 I was employed by Gumala Aboriginal Corporation in Tom Price as an
anthropologist preparing genealogies, writing family histories and making documentary
videos of ceremonies (see Day 1993, 1994, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004a, 2005).
From 2006 to the present I have participated in heritage surveys in the Pilbara with
native title claimants and mining companies as a consulting anthropologist and have
written reports of those surveys according to the guidelines of the Western Australian
Aboriginal Heritage Act, 1972 (see Day 2004b, c, d, 2007a, b, 2008a, b, c, d, e, f, g;
Day and Farnham 2010). During May 2009 I have been employed by the Martu Idja
Banyjima native title claimants as an anthropologist to advise in mediation meetings
organised by the National Native Title Tribunal in Karratha, Western Australia and to
critique the work of other anthropologists.
Before my university studies, from 1971 to 1979 I conducted research with Larrakia-
speaking traditional owners to prepare Larrakia claims to land rights. My research was
later submitted to the Aboriginal Land Rights Commissioner Mr Justice Woodward in
1973 (see Woodward 1973, 1974) and the Interim Aboriginal Land Commissioner Mr
Justice Ward in 1975 (see Ward 1975a, 1975b). Both Commissioners found in favour of
the Larrakia claims. I also published an Aboriginal rights newsletter called ‗Bunji‘
between 1971 and 1985 to publicise the Larrakia claims (see Day 1993). In addition, I
am the author of the book, ‗Bunji: a story of the Gwalwa Daraniki Movement‘,
published by Aboriginal Studies Press (Day 1994). This book was drawn from primary
sources and details a history of the struggle of the Larrakia people and others in the
Darwin area from 1971 to 1985.
iii
Contents
Author‘s experience .......................................................................................................... ii
Contents ........................................................................................................................... iii
Index of Plates ................................................................................................................. iii
Executive summary .......................................................................................................... 1
Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 3
Background history of Larrakia claims, 1969 - 1979 ....................................................... 3
The 1973 genealogy........................................................................................................ 13
The principle of descent ................................................................................................. 16
The Danggalaba clan ...................................................................................................... 18
The Tommy Lyons group ............................................................................................... 22
The Thompson family .................................................................................................... 27
Kathleen Minyinma ........................................................................................................ 28
The descendants of Frank Secretary ............................................................................... 29
The Larrakia language group .......................................................................................... 31
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 35
References ...................................................................................................................... 37
Appendix 1: Letter to Bill Day from National Archives ................................................ 41
Appendix 2: Letter from Raylene Singh......................................................................... 42
Appendix 3: Constitution of the Gwalwa Daraniki Association Inc .............................. 44
Appendix 4: The 1973 Topsy Secretary genealogy........................................................ 47
Appendix 5: The Danggalaba clan (Walsh 1981) .......................................................... 52
Index of Plates
Plate 1: A newspaper report of the Larrakia land claim at Kulaluk (NT News June 15,
1971). Front: Norman Barral Harris, Bobby Secretary. Behind; Topsy Secretary,
Gabriel Secretary, plus two unknown others ............................................................ 5
Plate 2: Bobby Secretary 1973 Plate 3: Dolly Gurinyi 1973 ......... 6
Plate 4: The protest march from Kulaluk to the CBD, July 9, 1971. Left to right: Albert
Marego, Josephine Rankin, Topsy Secretary, Gabriel Secretary, Rankin boy, Billy
Munji, Bobby Secretary, Norman Harris, Harold Woodie (Photo NT News). ........ 6
Plate 5: A newspaper report on Bobby Secretary‘s call out to all Larrakia (NT News
May 29, 1971). ......................................................................................................... 7
Plate 6: Dolly Gurinyi and Victor Williams at Emery Point on May 14, 1973 (NT
News) ........................................................................................................................ 8
Plate 7: ‗Songs of death to lament lost link‘, NT News, December 28, 1973. ............... 12
Plate 8 & 9: Raylene Singh‘s welcome in the introduction to the Program for the
Darwin Festival 2010. (Right) Tommy Lyons (glasses) and Bobby Secretary (T
shirt) listen to Mr Justice Woodward at Kulaluk in 1973 (Day 1996). .................. 26
1
Executive summary
During the Kenbi land claim the Northern Land Council proposed a language group
model as a principle of descent for the Larrakia claimants. The language group model
increased the number of claimants to approximately over one thousand members.
Originally the claim had been confined to the members of the Danggalaba clan who
were recognised by Belyuen residents as the traditional owners of the Cox Peninsula
(Brandl et al 1979). The Danggalaba clan was defined as descendants of four
classificatory brothers, King George, Frank Secretary, Crab Billy Belyuen and Tommy
Lyons. Their first generation descendants were Prince of Wales, Bobby Secretary,
Topsy Secretary, Gabriel Secretary, Kathleen Minyinma, Paula Thompson and Olga
Singh. Tibby Quall spoke for others who claimed to belong to the Danggalaba clan as
the descendants of Dedja Batcho (Graham 1997).
Since the Kenbi decision by Mr Justice Gray in 2000, my research has revealed a family
tree submitted in 1973 as evidence to the Aboriginal Land Rights Commissioner, Mr
Justice Woodward by the Larrakia elder, Topsy Secretary (Appendix 4). The genealogy
appears to confirm not only the four classificatory brothers, but also Mr Quall‘s
assertion that the descendants of Dedja Batcho are members of the Danggalaba clan (see
Graham 1997). I suggest that the family tree is evidence that the ‗part-Aboriginal‘
descendants of Dedja Batcho, were accepted by Topsy Secretary and others as
Danggalaba members. Indeed, in 1973, from my knowledge, Topsy Secretary would not
deny this, considering that Dedja Batcho‘s sister, Dolly Gurinyi, who I knew personally,
was at the time a highly respected Larrakia elder, ceremonial leader1 and speaker of the
Larrakia language. Unfortunately, Dolly Gurinyi died in late 1973 (Plate 6) leaving no
known descendants. Brandl and Walsh (1983:151) note: ‗Topsy Secretary, a Larrakia
woman, says of the part-European daughters of her mother‘s sister: ―We say Larrakia
full-blood.‖‘
During the prolonged Kenbi claim, the Larrakia split into three groups - the Larrakia,
the Tommy Lyons group and the Danggalaba group. Meanwhile, the Tommy Lyons
group sought separate representation. However, the senior surviving member of the
Tommy Lyons group, his granddaughter Raelene Singh, admitted during the hearings
that other descendants of the four classificatory brothers also had rights to the land in
1 Pers. Comm. Tibby Quall.
2
question. As well, the descendants of Topsy Secretary, who mostly live at Kulaluk,
continue to identify as Danggalaba despite the fact that they were included in the wider
Larrakia group in the later Kenbi claim and in the native title claim to land in Darwin.
However, throughout the Kenbi claim and the native title claim Mr Quall continued to
assert the identity of his group as Danggalaba (see Mansfield 2006: Para 4).
Eventually, Mr Justice Gray found in favour of the Tommy Lyons group as the
traditional owners of the claim area, but made allowances for the interests of the wider
Larrakia group. While there may be good reason why the members of the Tommy
Lyons group sought separate representation in the Kenbi claim, they could not and did
not deny that the rightful claimants for Kenbi were the Danggalaba clan.
In light of the above, this report suggests that the land claim process drove a wedge
between members of the Danggalaba clan. In addition, land claim precedents and the
1973 genealogy suggest that the emphasis on patrilineal descent was not in keeping with
Larrakia adapted laws and customs, and as such was unnecessary, divisive and
contradictory. However, despite the confusion perhaps caused in part by the handling of
the land claim by the Northern Land Council, this report suggests that the principle of
descent for the ‗true Danggalaba‘ group continued to exist as cognative descent from
the four classificatory brothers and the sister, Blanchie.
In the native title claim to land in Darwin before Mr Justice Mansfield, the Batcho
family‘s claim to be descendants of the Danggalaba clan was not accepted. However,
the wider Larrakia group included many families not shown on the 1973 genealogy. In
addition, the Thompson family who live in Darwin and are descendants of Tommy
Lyons do not appear to have been involved as witnesses. Instead, the court heard
evidence from many of the Larrakia group who had only relatively recently discovered
their Larrakia ancestry and in several cases appear to have lost their connection, as
defined by the requirements of the Native Title Act, by being removed, fostered or
otherwise being displaced. I suggest that if the 1973 genealogy had been available to
define the Danggalaba group more inclusively, then a picture of Larrakia connection to
land more favourable to the Danggalaba claimants may have emerged.
3
Introduction
The anthropologist was asked to give an expert opinion on:
a) the significance of a Larrakia genealogy prepared by Topsy Secretary and Bill
Day in 1973 for the Aboriginal Land Rights Commission and apparently not
previously used as evidence in Larrakia land claims made under the Aboriginal
Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act, 1976 or the Native Title Act, 1993.
b) The relevance of the 1973 genealogy in relationship to the claim by Mr Kevin
(Tibby) Quall and others that the Danggalaba Clan was the holder of native title
rights and interests in the Darwin area.
In 2006, Mr Justice Mansfield (Para 3) stated:
There were three different claimant groups within the consolidated proceedings: the
Larrakia applicants; the Quall applicants; and the Roman applicants. The Roman
applicants discontinued their claim during the course of the hearing. That left the
Larrakia applications on behalf of the ‗Larrakia People‘ and the Quall applications
on behalf of the Danggalaba Clan, and the Kulumbiringin Clan. Mr Quall claimed
that the Danggalaba Clan was the holder of native title rights and interests over the
claim area, rather than the larger Larrakia claim group, because that clan alone had
continued to observe the traditional laws and customs of the Aboriginal society
which existed at sovereignty.
This report discusses the ‗Danggalaba Clan‘2 and the ‗Larrakia People‘, in relation to
evidence from the 1973 genealogy, more recent evidence and by re-examining evidence
presented by the Northern Land Council and others to Mr Justices Olney (1991), Gray
(2000) and Mansfield (2006). However, in the time and resources available, this report
does not comment in depth on the continued observation of laws and customs, beyond
the apparent continuing existence of a land owning group known as the Danggalaba
Clan with rights and interests in the claim area. A copy of the 1973 genealogy and other
documents on which these conclusions were based are included at the end of this report
as Appendices 1 – 5.
Background history of Larrakia claims, 1969 - 1979
A detailed summary of ethnographic and historical studies of the Larrakia people was
prepared for the Kenbi Land Claim book (Brandl et al 1979). Sam Wells also has
published a book of Larrakia personal histories which includes an overview of Larrakia
2 In 1971 the Bunji newsletter cited information from Bobby Secretary that ‗Larrakia is Koolamirikin‘
(Bunji September 1971).
4
history (Wells 2001:1-47; see also Wells 1997; Povinelli 1993). Robert Graham (1997)
also gives a brief summary of Larrakia history in his report and Mr Justice Mansfield
includes a lengthy and comprehensive summary and discussion of Larrakia history in
his findings (Mansfield 2006). In the limited time available to prepare this report it is
not possible or necessary to discuss the contact history of the Larrakia people as
recorded in the above reports. Instead, this report is primarily based on the contact
between the author and the surviving Larrakia people from 1970 to the present.
In 1969 when I moved to Darwin, Aboriginal people were experiencing new freedom
since the revoking of the NT Social Welfare Ordinance in 1964. Many Aborigines had
moved off the reserves which were still operated by the Welfare Department and had
established camps in vacant bushland around Darwin. At one such camp I first met
Bobby Secretary, and later his brother Gabriel and his sister Topsy, as well as the
Larrakia elders, Norman Harris, Dolly Gurinyi, Topsy Garamanak and Captain Bishop
(see Plate 1). In May 1971 it was reported that Bobby Secretary wished to make a land
claim to the area where he was camped, known as Kulaluk3
Douglas Lockwood mentions Bob Secretary in the book, The Front Door: Darwin,
1869-1969 (Lockwood 1968:102):
If finders were keepers, Darwin would belong to Gwila-marinya, known as Bob
Secretary, of the Larrakia tribe of Australian Aborigines. His tribesman, George
Mungalo, says:
Bob Secretary is the big boss of all Darwin. This is his country. It belonged
to his father before, and that one‘s father before him ... before the white man
came.
Bobby Secretary independently told me that his Aboriginal name was ‗Koolamurinee‘
and that his tribe was ‗Koolamirikin‘ as I later reported in my newsletter, Bunji,
(September 1971) which I published from 1971 to 1985. At the time I had not read the
Lockwood book.
3 NT News May 30, 1971, p.1
5
Plate 1: A newspaper report of the Larrakia land claim at Kulaluk (NT News June 15, 1971).
Front: Norman Barral Harris, Bobby Secretary. Behind; Topsy Secretary, Gabriel Secretary,
plus two unknown others. (Note: Quotes in newspapers from Aboriginal people are not
necessarily verbatim. Bobby Secretary is quoted as saying, ‗[Kulaluk] is the only place left in
Darwin that has any significance to the tribe‘; however, I suggest that he was referring to
significant camping places remaining on vacant Crown land).
6
Plate 2: Bobby Secretary 1973 Plate 3: Dolly Gurinyi 1973
Plate 4: The protest march from Kulaluk to the CBD, July 9, 1971. Left to right: Albert Marego,
Josephine Rankin, Topsy Secretary, Gabriel Secretary, Rankin boy, Billy Munji, Bobby
Secretary, Norman Harris, Harold Woodie (Photo NT News).
In the coming years I was impressed by the readiness of the Larrakia people to
demonstrate for what they considered their land rights. I recorded their struggle in the
newsletter, Bunji, which was distributed around Darwin and to a growing list of
subscribers. Both the Gray and Mansfield reports refer to many of these Larrakia
protests (see also Day 1994). One of the earliest Larrakia protests was a walk (mostly in
bare feet) from their camp at Kulaluk to the city centre on National Aborigines Day,
1971. Placards included, ‗I am Larrakia and proud of it‘ and, ‗We love our land‘ (Plate
3).4
4A co-authored (unpublished) biography of Topsy Secretary by Sean Heffernan (1994) is titled
‗Gweylgwa ngayuboenoe gwoyalwa nganigi: ―I burnt my feet for this country, this is my country.‖‘
7
Amongst the concerns expressed was the protection of the burial ground down from
Totem Road in Darwin, on the old Bagot Reserve that had been revoked in 1965 (see
Woodward 1974). Following a request from Canberra, a Senior Welfare Officer named
Jack Doolan was asked to locate the boundaries of the burial ground which was by then
covered with thick scrub. Doolan asked for advice from Victor Williams who assisted to
identify the boundary of the graveyard. On 8th
October 1973, Jack Doolan wrote to the
Director of DAA (73/6578):
Mr Victor Williams accompanied me and pointed out the area which has been drawn
on the attached map. Mr Williams believes that there could be as many as two
hundred people buried there. He also advised that there may be as many as ten or a
dozen other graves between the area shown on the map and Bagot Reserve.
On a hut at Kulaluk I painted a list of known Larrakia people (on advice from the
Secretary family) which included Victor Williams‘s name.5
As noted in the land claim hearings, the Larrakia protests received extensive publicity
from 1971 to 1975. Amongst the earliest reports was an article, ‗A Call Out for all
Larrakia‘ (Plate 2. NT News May 29, 1971):.
Plate 5: A newspaper report on Bobby Secretary‘s call out to all Larrakia (NT News May 29,
1971).
5 From this list of names, Doolan reported that 7 were ‗full Larrakia‘, 3 others from maternal descent and
4 from paternal descent, a total of 14 (National Archives of Australia). A photograph of the hut and
names appears in ‗We have bugger all: the Kulaluk story‘ by Cheryl Buchanan (1974).
8
Over the following years I attended Larrakia gapuk, or smoking, ceremonies at Kulaluk,
and listened to many hours of singing accompanied to the ‗bambu‘ or didgeridoo. I
discovered that many of the landmarks around Darwin were better known by their
Larrakia names, some of which I recorded in the newsletter, Bunji. When the Aboriginal
Land Rights Commission was announced, I began to assist the Larrakia people to
research their land claims, particularly to a place that held great significance to them
known as Gundal at Emery Point (see Ward 1975b). The claim to Gundal has been
commented on by both Gray (2000) and Mansfield (2006).
Plate 6: Dolly Gurinyi and Victor Williams at Emery point on May 14, 1973 (NT News)
On June 2nd
, 1973, the Aboriginal Land Rights Commissioner Mr Justice Woodward
visited Kulaluk to talk to the Larrakia.6 A week previously a public notice was inserted
in the NT News stating: ‗All Larrakia tribe descendants who may be eligible for land
rights – you are invited to meet Judge Woodward – Saturday 10 a.m. at Kulaluk,
Coconut Grove. F. Fogarty, Vice Pres. Gwalwa Daraniki‘ (NT News May 31, 1973,
6 See ‗Transcript of Notes of Discussion, Kulaluk, Darwin, Northern Territory, 02 June 1973‘, National
Archives of Australia, Series A4257, 2 PART 8, previously marked ‗not yet examined‘ and as a result of
my payment and request now digitalised and marked ‗Open, date of decision 14 May 2009‘.
9
p.27). Following these discussions (see Plate 8) a letter was received from the
Commissioner requesting further information. As a result, I prepared a Larrakia
genealogy with Topsy Secretary and mailed this to the Aboriginal Land Rights
Commission with a covering letter. The genealogy and correspondence is recorded in a
file held by the National Archives of Australia in Canberra.7
To my knowledge, no additional people who identify as Larrakia had answered our calls
for claimants.8 Prior to 1973, numbers of Larrakia had ranged from fourteen
9 to
eighteen.10
In 1977, Federal Cabinet papers noted: ‗The immediate group of Larrakia
people and their close relations is small, numbering only some 20 people...‘ 11
Woodward (1973:49) in his first report states:
When I first met them I was told that there are some 18 members of the tribe left.
Later information suggests that fewer than this number can trace paternal descent
from Larrakia, but there are more who identify themselves as Larrakia because of
maternal links. They have told me that the whole of Darwin is built on Larrakia
country...‘
However, the Topsy Secretary genealogy of 1973 submitted to Woodward includes
many more people who identified as Larrakia, plus more unnamed children. The
genealogy has a dot marked beside some names. A note says that ‗[dot] indicates these
people speak the [Larrakia] language‘. There are fifteen dots. Beside the genealogy is a
note: ‗Names underlined in red would consider themselves eligible for land rights‘.12
There are eighty-two names underlined. Unfortunately I did not keep a copy of the
genealogy before posting it to the Aboriginal Land Rights Commission (see Appendix
4).
7Series Number A4252, control symbol 33, item ‗Gwalwa Daraniki, Series of correspondence‘ (see
Appendix 4). Also see Appendix 1. Letter from the National Archives of Australia, Canberra, to W B
Day, 23 June 2004. 8 The newsletter Bunji (May 973) announced: ‗Judge Woodward will meet the Larrakias and members of
the Gwalwa Daraniki at Kulaluk...all these people must be at Kulaluk on that day...be there!‘ 9 Report by Jack Doolan mentioned in Mansfield (2006: Para 402)
10 Woodward (1973).
11 National Archives of Australia, Submission No. 1828: Kulaluk Land Claim, Darwin – Decision 4367
(GA) and 4367 (GA) Amended, Series A12909, Control symbol 1828, Barcode 8911869, page 7. 12
‗Gwalwa Daraniki, Series of correspondence‘, Series Number A4252, control symbol 33, National
Archives of Australia, Canberra.
10
My covering letter expresses my surprise at the number of people who were identified
by Topsy Secretary as Larrakia.13
I knew the older members but had not met most of
their children, some of whom Topsy was able to name for me.14
Although she did not
give much detail of the upper generations, the genealogy provided a conceptual
framework of how the various families were related. In particular the genealogy shows a
distinct ‗clan‘ of four classificatory brothers and a Larrakia ‗sister‘ (Appendix 4). Dolly
Gurinyi and Dedja Batcho are shown as sibling descendants of the Larrakia ‗sister‘ and
her Larrakia spouse. On the genealogy, Dolly Gurinyi and Dedja Batcho are shown as
members of the same ‗clan‘ as Bobby Secretary, Topsy Secretary, Gabriel Secretary,
Prince of Wales, Kathleen Minyinma, Olga Lyons and their children.
I do not recall the word ‗Danggalaba‘ being used to describe this family group, although
it could have been. However, Cheryl Buchanan (1974:iii) records in her introduction,
‗now Bobby Secretary is Larrakia and the Larrakia inhabited Darwin for some 50,000
years... The Larrakia people are salt water people; their totem is the crocodile and they
would be lost living inland.‘ In addition, later research by the Northern Land Council
(NLC) identifies the Danggalaba clan as the same four classificatory brothers as shown
by Topsy Secretary in 1973. That is, Tommy Lyons, Crab Billy Belyuen, King George
and Frank Secretary (Brandl et al 1979).
At least six years before the Kenbi land claim, the genealogy by Topsy Secretary
appears to confirm that the Larrakia accepted cognative descent. The note on the
genealogy states:
Children of mixed marriages have identified as Larrakia:
a) If their father is Larrakia.
b) If they were brought up by a widowed or deserted mother.
c) If the family lived in Darwin and had one Larrakia parent.15
Apparently, on the genealogy by Topsy Secretary the descendants of Dolly Gurinyi and
Dedja Batcho were situated equally as descendants of the same group as the
descendants of Tommy Lyons, Crab Billy Belyuen, King George and Frank Secretary.
13
ibid 14
Not all names are correct and in order of birth. The children‘s names are from Topsy‘s knowledge only. 15
‗Gwalwa Daraniki, Series of correspondence‘, Series Number A4252, control symbol 33, National
Archives of Australia, Canberra.
11
Topsy Secretary‘s grandchildren were listed as ‗people eligible for land rights‘ as were
Dolly Gurinyi and Victor Williams and his six named children plus five other children
of Dedja Batcho (and presumably their descendants). The fact that that these named
descendants and their unnamed children may be second, third or fourth generation
matrifiliates does not appear to be a deterrent to their inclusion by Topsy Secretary as
people ‗eligible for land rights‘.
In her lifetime, Dolly Gurinyi (Plates 3 and 5) was a ceremonial leader amongst women
in the Larrakia and neighbouring language groups.16
The linguist Mark Harvey has
acknowledged his debt to Dolly Gurinyi in his recordings of the Larrakia language held
by the Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies. Dolly was
closely involved with the Kulaluk land claim and the land claim to Emery Point (Wells
2001:181). Tibby Quall has consistently reminded the courts of the central role his great
Aunty Dolly played in maintaining Larrakia laws, customs and language.
The Kenbi Land Claim Book (Brandl et al 1979) is dedicated to ‗a number of
knowledgeable traditional owners and others‘ who died before the claim book was
published. The names and dates cited include: ‗Dolly Garinyee and Topsy Karamana
[sic] died in 1973, Victor Williams in 1977, Tommy Lyons, or Imabulg, in 1978, and,
most recently, Johnny Fejo, in November, 1979.‘ At least the first two of these Larrakia
elders died before research on Kenbi began; however, all were alive in 1973 when
Topsy Secretary prepared the genealogy for Mr Justice Woodward (see Plate 6 next
page, ‗Songs of death to lament lost link‘, NT News, December 28, 1973).
Before the passing of the Aboriginal Land Rights Act, an Interim Aboriginal Land
Commissioner was appointed, Mr Justice Ward, who began hearings for the Larrakia
claims to Kulaluk, Goondal and Old Man Rock (see Ward 1975a, 1975b).17
Following
the final Woodward Report (1974) the fledgling Northern Land Council had begun to
take a role in preparing evidence for the Larrakia claims. For example in three cases
cited by Mr Justice Mansfield (2006) the interview and inspection were both conducted
by Mr Wilders of the Northern Land Council, and not myself as stated. (Mansfield
[2006: Paras 407, 408] refers to ‗an interview transcript between Bill Day and George
Munggalu, taken on 1 July 1975‘ and ‗another interview between Bill Day, Tommy
16
Pers com. Tibby Quall. 17
Victor Williams was amongst those who gave evidence regarding the site at Emery Point.
12
Imabul and Sam Fejo‘ and also notes that ‗Tommy Imabul then showed Bill Day where
―men‘s business‖ had taken place‘).
From 1975 onwards I was not directly involved in preparing the Larrakia claims,
although I continued to publish the newsletter, Bunji, until 1985, when I left Darwin.
Neither was I asked to give evidence in any of the Larrakia cases (Olney, Maurice,
Gray, Mansfield) although my writings or media references to the texts were used in
evidence. To my knowledge, the genealogy prepared by Topsy Secretary and myself in
1973 was not used as a resource or produced as evidence in either of the Kenbi land
claims (Olney 1991; Gray 2000) or the Larrakia native title claim (Mansfield 2006).
Plate 7: ‗Songs of death to lament lost link‘, NT News, December 28, 1973.
13
The 1973 genealogy
If read in conjunction with the Northern Land Council genealogies and research
prepared for the Kenbi Claim, the 1973 Topsy Secretary genealogy provides evidence
of a connection from 1973 to an ancestor living before sovereignty (see Appendix 5).
Topsy Secretary was a recognised Larrakia leader when I knew her and well qualified to
provide information for a Larrakia genealogy. Her respected position was recognised in
1991 by the Aboriginal Land Commissioner, Mr Justice Olney (1991: Para 9.20), when
he stated, ‗[Topsy Secretary] is clearly a leader among the Larrakia people in the
Darwin area as were her brother Bobby and her father Frank before her.‘ Heffernam
(1996, 1997:1) also states: ‗Along with Prince Mitbul, Topsy Secretary is one of the
most senior traditional owners of Darwin and the Cox Peninsular or the Northern
Territory of Australia.‘
The 1973 genealogy was prepared before the passing of the Aboriginal Land Rights
(NT) Act, 1976. In addition:
a) the genealogy was prepared during the lifetime of elders named above who did
not give evidence in either Kenbi or the native title claim;
b) the genealogy was prepared before the so-called ‗revival‘ of the Larrakia
language group;18
c) Larrakia identity was less politicised. For example, in 1983 the Larrakia
Association was formed and in August 1983 a group of urban Larrakia wrote to
the NLC seeking to be added to the list of claimants (Olney 1991: Para 7.2.4).
Mr Justice Mansfield (2006: Para 839) refers to this ‗revival‘ when he stated: ‗In the
1970s the [Larrakia] land claims drew interest to the Larrakia culture and there has since
been a revival of the Larrakia community and culture. A large number of people who
now identify as Larrakia only became aware of their ancestry during these land claims,
and acquired much ―knowledge‖ at this time.‘ However, prior to 1985 when the writer
of this report left Darwin, the numbers of people identifying as Larrakia to my
knowledge remained relatively stable as were identified on the 1973 genealogy.
18
See Walsh (1995:97-124)‗Tainted evidence: literacy and traditional knowledge in an Aboriginal land
claim‘
14
I believe the significant points of the rediscovered 1973 genealogy are:
a) the genealogy supports the claims of the Batcho family that there were
mistakes in the genealogies prepared by the Northern Land Council
(NLC);
b) the genealogy is evidence that cognative descent was a recognised
principle of descent;
c) the genealogy confirms the membership of the Danggalaba clan;
d) the genealogy shows the names of those who Topsy Secretary identified
as Larrakia before the so called revival of the Larrakia people in the late
1970s and 1980s.
For the above reasons I regard the 1973 genealogy as a definitive record of the
Danggalaba clan.
The inclusion of many families (over 1,000 people) in the Larrakia native title claim
who are not shown on the 1973 genealogy had several negative effects on the native
title claim:
a) Diluted the evidence by accepting people who had no continuing connection;
b) Gave the impression that the Danggalaba clan had ceased to exist as a separate
group;
c) Gave the impression that there had been a break in Larrakia connection to
country;
d) Gave the impression that there had been a revival of Larrakia laws, customs and
beliefs in after the 1970s, rather than a continuous connection to land through
laws and customs.
Referring to the Larrakia land rights protests of the 1970s, Mr Justice Mansfield (2006:
Para 388) states: ‗Indeed it is noteworthy that the historical record shows that people of
mixed descent did not participate in any of the demonstrations outlined above.‘
However, the 1973 genealogy and other indicators suggest that ‗people of mixed
descent‘, including Topsy Secretary‘s grandchildren and the descendants of Dedja
Batcho, were equally recognised as members of the Danggalaba clan. Brandl and Walsh
(1983:151) cite a statement by Johnny Fejo from the newsletter Bunji (January 1973):
‗If one girl marries to a white bloke and has a baby, it‘s a half-caste‘, but we call it full-
blood Larrakia...‘ Brandl and Walsh (1983:151) comment: ‗Identification is bilateral
15
then and ―full-blood‖ is taking on a sense equivalent to ―authentic‖.‘ There may be
many explanations for ‗people of mixed descent‘ not participating in the political
protests. For example they were more likely to be employed and face external pressures
not to participate. As stated, amongst those whose names appeared on the 1973
genealogy, Victor Williams otherwise participated from the early 1970s.
After 1989, witnesses from the wider Larrakia group of over 1000 members were drawn
from families not included on the 1973 genealogy. Some stated that they had only
become involved in the late 1980s (see Day 2009).19
For example, in 1989 Richard
Barnes said he became involved in the Kenbi Land Claim in about 1981-2. The
transcript below cites his explanation (Avery 1997:135-136)20
:
Mr Parsons: ... Perhaps we can first of all ask you about your involvement in the
land claim.
Richard Barnes: Yes.
Mr Parsons: And I guess in matters on behalf of Larrakia. When did you become
involved and why?
Richard Barnes: I got involved about eight years ago. The reason I got involved
is I got into conversation with my Uncle Delfin, and I had not heard a lot about
the land claim at the time and he told me something about it because he had been
involved with it earlier, a number of years earlier. And he explained what he had
done about it and asked if I would be interested in helping, and once I knew what
it was about I agreed to help.
Mr Parsons: Prior to then, had you been involved with any Larrakia issues that -
or anything to do with Larrakia land?
Richard Barnes: No. I have not been involved with any – anything to do with
Larrakia business as such. I - - -
Mr Parsons: Why was that do you think?
Richard Barnes; I did not – I do not think there was anything going on. I did not
know about anything that was happening. The – before the land rights came into
being there was not really much that Aboriginal people could do to acquire land
or look after land or anything like that. It just was not much said about it. There
did not seem to be any process for doing it.
19
See Paul Toohey, ‗The traditional owner next door‘, The Weekend Australian, 16 December, 2000. 20
According to a full page notice in the Northern Territory News (June 5, 2008, p.4), ‗Chairman of the
Larrakia Development Corporation, Koolpinyah Richard Barnes, is regularly consulted by the Aboriginal
Areas Protection Authority regarding sacred sites in Larrakia country, knowing he has been asked to do
this by the most senior Larrakia Ceremony man and that this cultural authority was confirmed in writing
by Senior Larrakia Elders.‘
16
Further background to the involvement of Richard Barnes is given by Avery
(1997:137):21
Before 1982 then, it is unlikely that Richard Barnes had any significant
knowledge of Larrakia traditions or other Aboriginal matters. Although his uncle
Delphin Cubillo had been involved in the Darwin Aboriginal movement to
protect Gundal at Emery Point and to obtain land in Darwin, Richard Barnes said
he had no knowledge of this activity at the time. He first became aware of it in
about 1982 (4741-3, see also 4745).
Referring to the Quall claimants, Mr Justice Mansfield (2006: Para 800) wrote: ‗...I am
not satisfied that there is a separate more confined society of Aboriginal persons
comprising the second applicants who, alone among those who comprise what Mr Quall
called the wider ―Larrakia language group‖, possess rights and interests under
―traditional‖ laws and customs by which they have a connection to the land and waters
of the claim area.‘ However, the 1973 genealogy supports Tibby Quall‘s assertion that
there is a separate more confined society than the NLC model of the wider ‗Larrakia
language group‘. If read in conjunction with the Kenbi claim, the 1973 genealogy
appears to be evidence that a ‗more confined‘ society existed, namely a cognative
descent Danggalaba clan consisting of the descendants of Tommy Lyons, Crab Billy
Belyuen, King George, Frank Secretary and Blanchie, and as such is a corrective to the
wider Larrakia group advocated before Mr Justice Mansfield
The principle of descent
The Kenbi Land Claim book (Brandl et al 1979:155) used the model of a patrilineal
descent group as defined by Professor Stanner during the Walpiri land claim, ‗through
the paternal and grand-paternal line from a common ancestor or founder‘ (Toohey
1978:24). Mr Justice Olney (1991: Para 7.1.8) comments: ‗The authors say that this
conforms to the way in which the living members of the Danggalaba clan see
themselves and the way in which they are publicly identified.‘
By 1989, precedents in land claims allowed patrilineal and matrilineal descent (Toohey
1981, 1982; Kearney 1984, 1988). These precedents would have allowed for a more
21
See also Walsh (1995) regarding use by witnesses of anthropologists‘ reports and other research in
Kenbi evidence.
17
inclusive Danggalaba clan as confirmed by the 1973 genealogy. However, instead of
widening the patrilineal clan to include matrifiliates the NLC changed the Larrakia
model from the restricted patrilineal Danggalaba clan to all-inclusive ‗Larrakia language
group‘ (see Scambary 2007; Sutton 1998). Commenting on ‗Ten Years On‘ (Walsh
1989a), Mr Justice Gray (2000: Para 2.18.2) wrote: ‗The Danggalaba clan therefore
consisted of only four patrilineal descendants‘.22
He added that the NLC proposed ‗an
alternative model of the appropriate claimant group the Larrakia language group. At the
time, in excess of 700 people had been identified as members of the Larrakia language
group through matrifiliation, patrifiliation or both.‘ The effects of this change are
discussed in a following paragraph.
In ‗Ten Years On‘, the linguist, Michael Walsh, (1989a:24) on behalf of the Northern
Land Council proposed ‗the Larrakia language group‘ as an alternative model of a local
descent group.23
Mr Justice Olney (1991: Para 7.2.2) comments: ‗Whatever the situation
in 1979, 10 years later the primary basis for constituting a local descent group in the
claim area is said to be affiliation through the language label, Larrakia.‘ However, in my
experience prior to 1985, such a broad definition of a descent group was not necessary
because at least at Kulaluk there was agreement on Larrakia relationships as expressed
in the 1973 genealogy.
‗Ten Years On‘ (Walsh 1989a:24) states: ‗The mode of recruitment to the local descent
group is filiation. This principle may be matrifiliation, patrifiliation or both ... The
Finniss (Toohey 1981) and Malak Malak (Toohey 1982) claims have perhaps excited
more interest than any other for Larrakia.... The outcome of these two claims appears to
have led the Larrakia to a reassessment of the term ―traditional‖ with respect to land
claims...‘ However, the 1973 genealogy suggests that consanguinal (bloodline) descent
had been the principle of descent at least since 1973, and much earlier in the case of the
children of Dedja Batcho and others who Topsy Secretary identified as Larrakia.
Mr Justice Olney was not persuaded by the change of approach by the Northern Land
Council and dismissed the Kenbi claim in 1991, finding only one person who fitted the
22
As stated earlier in this report, the 1973 genealogy included a classificatory ‗sister‘ of the four
‗brothers‘. 23
The report ‗Ten Years On‘ (Walsh 1989) recorded that the Danggalaba clan had been depleted by the
deaths of Bobby Secretary [1984] and Paula Thompson. In a foreword to the report, the authors said that
Olga Singh had also died on April 28th
, 1989, after the report was prepared.
18
requirements of the Land Rights Act survived and that therefore the Danggalaba clan
was doomed to extinction.
In 1992, in an appeal before Northrop Hill and O'Loughlin JJ in the Full Court of the
Federal Court of Australia held that ‗―local descent group‖ in the definition of
―traditional Aboriginal owners‖ in the Land Rights Act was not to be confined to a
patrilineal group ... the underlying principle of recruitment to a group must be some
form of descent, that need not be seen in a biological sense, and persons not claiming
biological affiliation may be adopted into and become part of the group...‘ (see Blowes
1992:15).
Northrop Hill and O'Loughlin JJ (at p.553) held that ‗The particular principle of descent
in operation will depend upon the circumstances of the particular case ... The point is
that the principle of descent will be one that is recognised as applying in respect of the
particular group. Further, there is no reason why the particular principle of descent
traditionally operating may not change over time... (cited in Blowes 1992:15).
If it is accepted that the 1973 genealogy is evidence that cognative descent was a
principle of descent for the Danggalaba clan, the statement by Mr Justice Gray (2000:
Para 13.4.3) (below) concerning descent may be irrelevant. However, the statement
does acknowledge a process that had already occurred according to the 1973 genealogy.
Mr Justice Grey (2000: Para 13.4.3) stated: ‗There is a range of possible courses by
which the Tommy Lyons group may become strengthened and ensure its continued
existence. A process which is known to have occurred among Aboriginal groups
elsewhere in the Northern Territory, whose patrilines have died out, is that a male
matrifiliate begins a new patriline. Jason Singh and Kathleen Minyinma‘s son,
Desmond, are the current first generation matrifiliate males of the group. It is possible
that one or both of them will have his or their children recognised as members of the
group. It is possible that the group will expand its membership by recognising second,
and perhaps subsequent, generation matrifiliates.‘
The Danggalaba clan
The genealogy prepared by Topsy Secretary in 1973 shows Frank Secretary, King
George, Billy Balyun [sic], Tommy Lyons and a Larrakia female (the mother of Dolly
Gurinyee and Dedja Batcho) as siblings. The four men and their descendants also
19
comprise the Danggalaba clan in the Kenbi Land Claim (Brandl et al 1979). Mr Justice
Gray (2000: Para 4.21) cites the ‘Descent criterion of the Danggalaba group: The
principle of descent on which the group is said to have been formed is descent from an
ancestor recognised to have been a member of the Danggalaba clan.‘ In the 1973 Topsy
Secretary genealogy, the descendants of Dolly Gurinyi and Dedja Batcho are situated
equally as descendants of the same group as the descendants of Tommy Lyons, Crab
Billy Belyuen, King George and Frank Secretary.
In 2000, Mr Justice Gray cited the Kenbi Land Claim book (Brandl et al 1979) which
listed seven people who fell within the definition of traditional Aboriginal owners in the
Land Rights Act with respect to the land claimed. They were: Bobby Secretary, Topsy
Secretary, Gabriel Secretary, Prince of Wales, Olga Singh, Rachel (or Paula) Thompson
and Kathleen (or Dolphin) Minyinma. Mr Justice Gray (Para 2.18.1) noted: ‗These
persons were considered to have as their principal dreaming, or durlg, the Danggalaba,
or crocodile‘. In the Kenbi Land Claim, Brandl et al (1979:172) say they asked the
question: ‗―Who owns the claim area?‖‘ and were told that ‗the Danggalaba clan owns
it‘. However, the 1973 genealogy supports the statement by Nelson Blake: ‗Auntie
Topsy [Secretary] all this mobs [descendants of Dedja Batcho] family, belong to Auntie
Topsy family. That old lady, Topsy Secretary, old Frank Secretary, family for all this
mob [descendants of Dedja Batcho]. Secretary and George King – that‘s his brother
(Graham 1997:13).‘
In 1991, Mr Justice Olney (1991: Para 9.21) cites page 428 of the Kenbi hearing
transcript:
MR PARSONS: Prince, what is that dreaming belong you? What is that dreaming for
you?
PRINCE: Danggalaba.
MR PARSONS: And what that mean in English?
PRINCE: Crocodile.24
Mr Justice Olney (1991: Para 7.3.5) states: ‗The pre-eminence of the Danggalaba clan
means that all surviving members of the Danggalaba clan automatically have a publicly
24
Brandl and Walsh (1983:152-3) comment: ‗Prince of Wales, the son of the senior danggalaba clan
ritual leader, King George, and a Wadjiginy-speaking mother, went through a so-called ‗Wagaitj‘
initiation and therefore has no responsibility for ceremonies of his own clan. ―Prince go back to
Wadjiginy way, because his mother and his grandfather Wadjiginy... that‘s the way‖, said one of our
informants.‘
20
recognised entitlement to Larrakia country but for those with a filiative [marriage] link
to some member of the Danggalaba clan two conditions should be satisfied: they must
accept their birthright and they must demonstrate an active interest in that country.‘
In 1997, ‗the Danggalaba claimant group‘ was separate to the ‗Tommy Lyons group‘
and the ‗Larrakia group‘. In the Kenbi claim before Mr Justice Gray, the consulting
anthropologist, Dr John Avery (1997:57), comments:
The Danggalaba group consists of seventeen claimants who had been among the
Larrakia claimants but who saw their claims arising on a different basis to that of the
other Larrakia. Their principle contention is that mistakes were made in the
genealogies that have made it appear that they are separate to the Tommy Lyon‘s
[sic] group. They say they (and the Tommy Lyons group) are Danggalaba and that
the Danggalaba are the traditional Aboriginal owners of the land. Consequently, the
Danggalaba claimants are the traditional owners of the land.25
Had it been available, the 1973 genealogy could have suggested confirmation of the
above claims of the Danggalaba group in the Kenbi claim.
The report by Mr Justice Gray (2000: Para 4.5.3) notes that ‗Tommy Lyons, Crab Billy
Belyuen, King George and Frank Secretary are described in the evidence as ―brothers‖.
Evidence of their respective lineages is sketchy and inconsistent. Dr Walsh‘s genealogy
[Appendix 5] shows them as being of the same generation but not having common
parents or grandparents.... That is to say, they saw themselves as brothers, even if they
did not have the biological relationship of brothers. This acknowledgement of
classificatory relationships has carried forward to the next generation.‘ This suggests
that Blanchie would have full rights as a classificatory ‗sister‘ as shown on the 1973
genealogy.
The 1973 genealogy (Appendix 4) shows that the mother of Dedja and Dolly was a
Larrakia woman who was the ‗sister‘ of the above males. The genealogy shows that the
spouse of the mother of Dedja and Dolly was a Larrakia man who was the uncle of
‗Peter Mundine‘. Later research by the Northern Land Council names the mother of
25
Note: By 1997, the NLC was representing the wider Larrakia group in the Kenbi land claim, rather than
the Danggalaba clan as proposed in the Kenbi Land Claim Book (Brandl et al 1979). The ‗Tommy Lyons
group‘ was represented separately.
21
Dedja and Dolly as Blanchie.26
The Topsy Secretary genealogy suggests that the
descendants (i.e. Dolly and Dedja) of the classificatory ‗sister‘ of the four ‗brothers‘
was accepted by Topsy Secretary and others as members of the same clan as Bobby
Secretary, Topsy Secretary, Gabriel Secretary, Prince of Wales, Kathleen Minyinma,
Olga Lyons and their children.
Mr Justice Gray (Para 4.5.15) commented: ‗In para. 4.22, I deal with the suggestions
that the descendants of Didja Batcho are descended from [a] deceased sister of King
George. Again, if that were proved to be the case, there is no evidence that any of the
descendants of Didja Batcho has been accepted by other members of the Tommy Lyons
group as members of that group...‘ However, the 1973 genealogy by Topsy Secretary
provides evidence that seems to contradict the above statement by Mr Justice Gray
(2000: Para 4.5.15), because the genealogy shown in Appendix 4 is evidence that
suggests Topsy Secretary included the descendants of Dedja Batcho as members of her
family group by cognative descent. Certainly this was my understanding at the time.
In addition, Mr Justice Gray (2000: Para 4.22.3) stated: ‗The earliest suggestion that the
descendants of Blanchie could claim descent from Pat Lawrie, by reason of his adoption
of Didja Batcho, did not come until 1996. Prior to that, Yula Williams and Rona Ally,
both daughters of Didja Batcho, had given evidence as to the identity of their
grandparents. Both had said that Blanchie was their grandmother and Batcho their
grandfather, making no mention of any adoptive grandfather.‘ The 1973 Topsy
Secretary genealogy suggests that Yula Williams was correct to claim Danggalaba
descent through a female ancestor, Blanchie.
According to the anthropologist Robert Graham (1997:8), the children of Dedja Batcho
told him: ‗Their identity is Larrakiya and Danggalaba. This was strongly asserted by
people of Yula William‘s [sic] generation who say that their close ties, and membership
of the Danggalaba was accepted by all in the homes where they grew up. They were
always taught that men like Crab Billy and King George were their countrymen. They
grew up with them. As Yula Williams told Robert Graham (1997:8), ‗My family should
go one way, Danggalaba. From my mum. The Williams‘s. I know who I am and where
my blood line flows‘ (Yula Williams, 13/2/97).
26
According to Walsh‘s Danggalaba genealogy (Appendix 5) ‗Peter Munjang‘ [Mundine] is the son of an
unnamed Danggalaba woman who was the classificatory sister of Crab Billy.
22
The Tommy Lyons group
In the Kenbi Land Claim, Mr Justice Gray (2000) recognised Raelene Singh and her
siblings in the Tommy Lyons group as traditional Aboriginal owners. Mr Justice Gray
(Para 28) found that ‗the only claimants who fell within the definition of ―traditional
Aboriginal owners‖ in the Land Rights Act, with respect to the Cox Peninsula, are the
members of the Tommy Lyons group. However, there is no suggestion in the 1973
genealogy that a separate group known as ‗the Tommy Lyons group‘ was recognised by
Topsy Secretary.
In 1971, Bobby Secretary sought to consult with Tommy Lyons as his elder,27
not as the
leader of a separate group. Both Tommy Lyons and Bobby Secretary attended the
meeting with Mr Justice Woodward at Kulaluk in 1973 (Plate 8).28
That the members of
‗the Tommy Lyons group‘ were regarded as members of the Danggalaba clan is
suggested by the 1973 genealogy. The consanguineal and filial connections of Raelene
Singh suggest that she is heavily influenced by her Wadjigiyn-Kiyuk ancestry and place
of abode (see following paragraphs).
Avery (1997:37) states: ‗[Raelene Singh] said consistently that she has learned about
[dreamings] from her mother, [and] her grandfather. However, although she must be
believed that she leaned a great deal from Maudie Bennett and her mother [Olga Singh],
there is some evidence that she has learnt most recently from her father, Johnny Singh
(Avery 1997:37).‘ Avery (p.37) then quotes from the transcript:
Mr Howie: Did you ever talk to you grandfather [Tommy Lyons] about this
country?
Raelene Singh: No, I was told.
Mr Justice Gray (2000: Para 2.21.1) states the Tommy Lyons group was named ‗for
convenience sake‘. He states: ‗When the inquiry resumed before me on 16 October
1995, two groups of claimants were represented separately by counsel. For convenience
in identifying it, this group was named the Tommy Lyons group...‘ Dr Benedict
Scambary (2007:155) notes:
27
NT News, 28 June 1971. 28
Plate 8. See ‗Transcript of Notes of Discussion, Kulaluk, Darwin, Northern Territory, 02 June 1973‘,
National Archives of Australia, Series A4257, 2 PART 8.
23
The Northern Land Council (NLC) made a strategic decision to divide the claimant
group into those descended patrilineally from apical ancestor Tommy Lyons, and the
wider Larrakia, who claim their descent cognatically from nine Larrakia apical
ancestors. This division fuelled intense contestation about membership of the group.
Many Larrakia found their authenticity as Larrakia was challenged by inclusion in
the larger group, which because of its descent model had less chance of fitting the
criteria of the act.
The separate representation and the reaction to it observed by Scambary suggest that the
formation of the Tommy Lyons group is an example of the damaging effects to social
structure that can be caused by a land claim (see Reeves 1998).29
However, it is also
possible that the ‗Tommy Lyons group‘ separated from the Larrakia claimants because
the wider language group included many people who were not known to the
descendants of Tommy Lyons.
Mr Justice Gray (2000: Para 4.3.2) stated: ‗The members of the Tommy Lyons group
identify four deceased men as their relevant ancestors. They are Tommy Lyons, Crab
Billy Belyuen, King George (also known as George King) and Frank Secretary. They
are regarded as having been brothers, and are acknowledged to have had close
connections with, and major ceremonial and other responsibilities for, the land
claimed.‘ ‗The ‗Tommy Lyons group‘ therefore recognises the ancestors shown on the
Topsy Secretary genealogy, except for the exclusion of the Larrakia woman who was
the mother of Dolly and Dedja Batcho. However Tibby Quall and the Danggalaba group
maintained, as claimants in the Kenbi land claim (Avery 1997:57), ‗...they (and the
Tommy Lyons group) are the Danggalaba and that the Danggalaba claimants are the
traditional Aboriginal owners of the land‘.
Tommy Lyons married a Wadjigiyn-Kiyuk woman, Maudie Bennett, who passed on her
knowledge to her children and grandchildren (Brandl et al 1979). Mr Justice Olney
(Para 7.3.5) described how leading members of the Tommy Lyons group/Danggalaba
29
According to the CAEPR Monologue, No. 27 (2007), ‗Benedict Scambary is an anthropologist with
over 10 years experience working with the Native Title Act in the Northern Territory. As an employee of
the Northern Land Council he was involved in the coordination of the Larrakia native title claims over
Darwin. He has recently completed a PhD in anthropology through the Centre for Aboriginal Economic
Policy Research, The Australian National University. [Note: Ben is now CEO of NT Aboriginal Areas
Protection Authority].
24
clan were taught by Wadjigiyn-Kiyuk people: ‗Knowledge of their country is now being
passed on to this group by very knowledgeable non-claimants such as their mother's
mother, Maudie Bennett and their father, John Singh [Wadjigiyn-Kiyuk]. The eldest,
Raelene, was only born in 1970 but could be expected to become a senior traditional
owner as she acquires the appropriate level of knowledge. In this case the transfer of
knowledge across generations is going from non-Larrakia to Larrakia (Olney 1991: Para
7.3.5).‘
Mr Justice Mansfield (2006: Para 728) makes a similar point. He wrote: ‗In my
judgment, there was no sustained positive attempt to maintain at Belyuen the integrity
of the knowledge and customs of the Larrakia people as distinct from those of the
Belyuen community.‘ However, Mr Justice Mansfield (2006: Para 715) also wrote:
‗There was primary evidence in these proceedings and during the Kenbi Claim hearing
which indicated the opinion of various members of the Larrakia community ... that the
‗Belyuen people‘ possessed a great deal of knowledge about Larrakia laws and
customs.‘
The 1973 genealogy suggests that through Tommy Lyons the Larrakia knowledge held
by ‗the Tommy Lyons group‘ belongs to the Danggalaba clan as shown on the 1973
genealogy. In the Kenbi claim there was a reliance on laws and customs of the
Wadjigiyn-Kiyuk affiliates associated with the ‗Tommy Lyons group‘ whereas the 1973
the genealogy suggests that the members of the ‗Tommy Lyons group‘ were in fact
members of the Larrakia Danggalaba clan. As evidence of that fact, in a letter dated 31
August 2009, signed by ‗Raylene Singh‘, the granddaughter of Tommy Lyons describes
herself as the ‗most senior Larrakia traditional owner for Kenbi‘. The letter to the
Wagait Shire Council seeking a meeting with them is written under the letterhead of
‗Kenbi Danggalaba Association Incorporated‘ (Appendix 3), suggesting that Raelene
Singh identifies as Danggalaba.30
Raelene Singh has also welcomed people to Larrakia Country in the introduction to the
Darwin Festival 2010 program. In the welcome she describes herself as ‗the Elder,
30
John Singh, widower of Olga Lyons, says of their three children, ‗Jason, Raelene and Zoe‘: ‗They‘ve
now become traditional through their mother and through their grandfather so now they‘re in the
Danggalaba clan which the Kenbi Land Clan [sic] are urging on to try and win it through the Territory
Government.‘ Mr Singh is described as a ‗Wadjigan and Kiuk person from Port Keats way [and] acting
Chairman of the Northern Land Council while Galarrwuy Yunupingu is on long service leave.‘ Talking
History, Land Rights News, November 1994, p.22.
25
named most senior Larrakia Traditional Owner and authority for Larrakia Country here
in Darwin, the surrounding region and across the Cox Peninsula to Kenbi...‘ Raylene
Singh also states in the Darwin Festival 2010 Program introduction, ‗Welcome to
Larrakia Country. We are the true Danggalaba‘ (Plate 7).
Once the wider group was established, it may have been difficult for the Danggalaba
group shown in the 1973 genealogy to assert their rights. As Scambary (2007:155)
notes, the NLC ‗made a tactical decision‘ to represent ‗the Tommy Lyons group‘
separately, while others like the descendants of Topsy Secretary joined the Larrakia
group. However, there is evidence that the basic structure of the Danggalaba clan shown
on the 1973 genealogy remained and remains to the present and that these diverse
branches of the Danggalaba clan can be viewed as a society sharing laws and customs
and spiritual affinity to land.
Mr Justice Gray (2000: Para 22) commented that the Tommy Lyons group‘s ‗core
members‘ are Raelene, Jason and Zoe Singh. He states: ‗They engage in ceremonial
activity which sustains the land claimed and, in turn, the land sustains them, physically
and spiritually ... The other members of the Tommy Lyons group have entitlements to
share the spiritual affiliations....‘ Presumably this includes descendants of Frank
Secretary, Crab Billy, King George and, according to Topsy Secretary, the Larrakia
woman known as Blanchie.
In his Consultant Anthropologist‘s report on the Kenbi land claim, Avery (1997:37)
cites a page from the transcript that illustrates the entitlements that appear to be held by
right, through a genealogical connection. Avery states: ‗[Raelene Singh] did not know
about whether the Thompson children (of Rachel/Paula Thompson) also got the baler
shell dreaming but changed her story after further cross-examination.‘ The transcript
continues:
Raelene Singh: Well, when my mum was alive, I wasn‘t told about them. I was only
told about me, Jason, Zoe, Kathleen, Prince and Topsy when I was young.
Mr Maurice: But you know now that they have the same connection to Tommy Lyons
as you do.
Raelene Singh: Yes, yes I know that.
Mr Maurice: Well, with that knowledge, can you think of any reason why they wouldn‘t
have that baler shell dreaming just like you?
26
Raelene Singh: The baler shell dreaming, it‘s for women‘s ceremony.
Mr Maurice; Yes? Well do you know Stephanie Thompson?
Raelene Singh: Yes.
Mr Maurice: And Sharon Thompson?
Raelene Singh: Yes.
Mr Maurice: What do you call them?
Raelene Singh: Sister.
Mr Maurice: Don‘t they have that baler shell dreaming?
Raelene Singh: Yes, they have that dreaming too.
Mr Maurice: Don‘t they get this country in the same way that you do?
Raelene Singh: Yes.
Mr Maurice: From Tommy Lyons?
Raelene Singh: Yes. (4561-2)
Plate 8: Raylene Singh‘s welcome in the introduction to the Program for the Darwin Festival
2010.
Plate 9: (Right) Tommy Lyons (glasses) and Bobby Secretary (T shirt) listen to Mr Justice
Woodward at Kulaluk in 1973 (Day 1996).
27
The Thompson family
One other family is listed as having rights in the Tommy Lyons group. Mr Justice Gray
(2000: Para 4.5.2) briefly mentions the Thompson family: ‗As well as his marriage to
Maudie Bennett, Tommy Lyons married a woman called Margaret Moy, whose
language was Gunwinygu. They had one daughter, Rachel (also known as Paula)
Thompson. Margaret Moy seems to have remarried and to have settled in Darwin. There
is evidence that Rachel/Paula Thompson declined to be involved in this land claim in
the early stages of its preparation [also see Brandl et al 1979:29-30]. She is now
deceased, but is survived by five children and seven grandchildren. There is little or no
evidence about them, although Raelene Singh did acknowledge Rachel/Paula
Thompson‘s children as her sisters and brothers.‘31
Mr Justice Gray (2000: Para 4.5.2) says, ‗Raelene Singh did acknowledge Rachel/Paula
Thompson‘s children as her sisters and brothers... They must be regarded as people who
have rights to be members of the group. If those rights were ever activated, the ultimate
entitlement to membership of the group would depend upon acceptance by the existing
members.‘
Paula had five children, Eddie, Stephanie, Una, Sharon and Andrew Thompson. Eddie
had four children, Shane, Owen, Mark and Tama Thompson. Stephanie has two
children, Victoria and Jethro Thompson. Una has one daughter, Andrea Thompson.
Stephanie Thompson lives in Darwin‘s Bagot Community where she is recognised as
Larrakia by other residents. For unknown reasons, the Thompsons are not shown on the
1973 genealogy.32
In 2010, some of the Thompson family who identify as Larrakia have expressed an
interest in being included in the native title claim. They have no explanation as to why
they were not consulted in Kenbi or the native later title claim. Their mother died before
1989 and they may have shared Kathleen Minyinmar‘s fear of involvement ‗in the
context of the controversies generated by this land claim‘ (see following section). In an
email to me dated 7 October 2010, their friend Denise Goodfellow suggests an element
of ‗intimidation‘ (see also Goodfellow 2007). Similarly, Adrienne McConvell (nee
31
Denise Goodfellow describes her family‘s close relationship with the Thompson family in her
autobiography, Quiet Snake Dreaming (Goodfellow 2007). 32
Stephanie Thompson has a genetic degenerative disease and her friend Denise Goodfellow is very
anxious that she give preservation evidence of her rights and interests as descendant of Tommy Lyons.
28
Haritos), a co-author of the Kenbi Land Claim (Brandl et al 1979), described in an email
how there were, ‗a number of people known to be Larrakia descendants who were not
wanting to be involved as claimants. Maybe people were very insecure about how they
might be targeted in the Darwin community if they were involved.‘ 33
Kathleen Minyinma
Kathleen Minyinma is shown on the Topsy Secretary genealogy as a descendant of
Billy Balyun (sic). Her name is underlined as one who would be ‗eligible for land
rights‘. The example of Kathleen Minyinma is an example that warrants discussing in
more detail because in her case Mr Justice Gray (2000: Para 4.6) describes how people
could ‗activate‘ their membership of the Danggalaba clan.
In 1991 Mr Justice Olney (Para 7.1.5) wrote: ‗Kathleen (or Dolphin) Minyinma (also
sometimes referred to as Kathleen Presley) is the daughter of the late Billy Minyinma
whose father was Crab Billy Belyuen. The latter‘s father is said to have been an adopted
or putative son of Tommy Lyons‘ grandfather. She has grown up away from the claim
area with a foster family.‘
Later in his report, Mr Justice Olney (1991: Para 9.22.5) expands on Kathleen‘s
position:
I have no doubt as to the sincerity of Kathleen Minyinma's desire to become more
knowledgeable concerning the traditions of her forebears. It is no fault of hers that
she has been denied, until recently, access to that knowledge. She strikes me as a
quiet but impressive person who may one day take up the mantle of her grandfather
and be a leader among the Larrakia, but however generous a view one takes of her
evidence, there is nothing upon which I can base a finding that she has any spiritual
affiliation to any relevant site in common with any other member of the Danggalaba
clan.
Nine years later Mr Justice Gray (2000: Para 4.6) commented:
[Kathleen] lives in Darwin. She has spent time staying with the Singh family at
Belyuen and has been introduced to sites and dreamings to a significant extent, in
33
Email from Adrienne McConvell to William B Day, October 6, 2010. Headlines at the time of the
claim included: ‗Land Claim ―Greedy Money Grab‖: Stone‘ (NT News 2 December 1996).
29
recognition of her entitlement to knowledge of the country ... Dr Rose explained that
Kathleen herself has a health problem and cares for an ailing mother and a sickly
child. She is also afraid of involvement with the group in the context of the
controversies generated by this land claim. It is clear that the lack of continuous
involvement of Prince of Wales and Kathleen Minyinma has not negated the fact
that they are regarded as members of the Tommy Lyons group. Kathleen‘s son
[Desmond], although young, is similarly accepted. Zoe Singh‘s two daughters, being
second generation matrifiliates, are perhaps not yet clearly members of the group. It
may be in due course the accepted descent criteria will be broadened, at least so as to
include them.
Later in his report, Mr Justice Gray (2000: Para 5.8.2) states: ‗Kathleen Minyinma has
been introduced to the land claimed. She has been welcomed to it by her classificatory
sisters, Raelene and Zoe, and her classificatory brother, Jason. She has activated her
entitlements as a member of the Tommy Lyons group (my emphasis).‘
The descendants of Frank Secretary
When the NT Chief Minister, Paul Everingham personally presented the land title to
Bobby Secretary at Kulaluk, he said, ‗The land on which Darwin is situated belonged to
the Larrakia before the white man first came to the Northern Territory, now Mr Bobby
Secretary is to receive the title to part of this land.‘34
In his final report Mr Justice Woodward (1974:53) wrote: ‗I have no doubt that the
Larrakia people were the traditional owners of what is now the whole Darwin area.
Some of the survivors, together with a few other Aborigines have formed an
organization calling itself Gwalwa Daraniki...‘ As members of the Gwalwa Daraniki
Association Inc in 2010, the Secretary family are the leaseholders of the Kulaluk Crown
lease in perpetuity.35
Their constitution stipulates that members must be members of the
Danggalaba Clan or their spouses (Appendix 3).
34
NT News, 27 August 1979. As the Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976 was not applicable in
towns, the Kulaluk land was treated as a needs claim under the NT Special Purposes Lease Act (see Day
2009). 35
‗Gwalwa Daraniki‘ was suggested to me by Bobby Secretary as a name for the association. The words,
variously spelled, mean ‗Our land‘ in Larrakia (see Mansfield 2006: Para 383).
30
In November, 2005, Dr Chris Burns, the NT Minister for Planning and Lands, gave an
explanation for the exclusion of the 301 hectare Kulaluk lease from the Larrakia native
title claim. Dr Burns wrote:
With regard to the lease being excluded from the Larrakia Native Title claim, the
issue of Crown Lease Perpetual No.671 predates the application for a
determination of native title. As such it is considered a previous exclusive
possession act which has extinguished native title.36
The amended constitution of the Gwalwa Daraniki Association Incorporated (GDA)
was lodged in September 2006 by Michael Chin, Barrister and Solicitor and signed by
Helen Secretary as Public Officer (Appendix 3). The GDA constitution recognises that
the descendants of Topsy Secretary identify as Danggalaba in stating:
Kulaluk Community means the community comprising persons who are:
a) descendants of the Danggalaba Clan of the Larrakia people; or
b) married to, or in a long-term de facto relationship with, a descendant of the
Danggalaba Clan of the Larrakia people.
Mr Justice Gray (2000: Para 4.4.4) notes that Topsy Secretary gave evidence in 1990
and 1995 but died prior to the end of his Kenbi inquiry. Gray (2000: Para 4.4.4) notes
that all the descendants of Topsy Secretary were listed in the Larrakia group in the
Kenbi claim. He adds that, ‗There is no evidence that these third and fourth generation
matrifiliates have activated any entitlements to membership of the Tommy Lyons
group, or have been accepted as members of the group.‘ The Topsy Secretary genealogy
would appear to contradict the statement that there is ‗no evidence‘ because the
descendants of Topsy Secretary are shown in genealogy as being in the same family
group (Danggalaba) as the descendants of Tommy Lyons. When questioned in the
Kenbi claim, Raelene Singh admitted that a family connection gives people rights
(Avery 1997:37).
Mr Justice Gray (2000: Para 4.10.3) lists the surviving descendants of Frank
Secretary.37
Topsy‘s daughter, Kathleen Secretary, died in 1986. Kathleen‘s son,
Christopher Shields, is also deceased. Five of Kathleen‘s six children survive.
36
Letter from NT Minister for Planning and Lands, Chris Burns to Bill Day, 15 November 2005. See Day
(2010). 37
Note: Bobby Secretary and Gabriel Secretary had no children.
31
According to Gray (2000) the surviving children are: ‗Lynette Shields, Helen Secretary,
Anna Secretary, Jacqueline Treeves and Kathleen Tina Secretary.38
Lynette has three
children, David, Martina and Setiona Shields. Chris Shields is survived by three
daughters, Helen, Nicole and Gabriella Shields. Helen Secretary has six children,
Michele, Raylene, Lynette, Leeanne, Anthony and Christopher Secretary. Jacqueline
Treeves has a son, Lawrence Secretary.‘39
The Larrakia language group
The 1973 genealogy indicates a wider Larrakia group of at least eighty-two persons,
including the Roman, Shepherd/Risk, Rankin, Browne, Baban, Reid, Campbell, Bishop,
Talbot and Kenyon families and their descendants. A group described as the ‗Woolner
side‘ includes the Fejo family, while others are named in a separate group labelled the
‗Minija side‘. On the genealogy I wrote a note that states:
Selma says: ‗When the Woolner, Minija and Larrakia tribes were almost gone, Fred
Waters (an elder d) said we would be together.‘ This is emphasised – Woolner,
Minija, Larrakia –one people.
The informant, ‗Selma‘, is listed in a family tree as ‗Minija side‘ that is not connected to
any other families on the genealogy. I consider this combining of similar groups to be a
survival tactic that would be unlikely to pass the requirements of the Native Title Act
for continuous connection. In addition, I believe those listed on the ‗Woolner and
Minija side‘ are affiliated in land claims with other groups.40
More research would be
needed to confirm this point, which is also applicable to others in the wider group
shown on the genealogy, unlike those who identify as Danggalaba.
During my involvement with the Larrakia, members of the families shown on the 1973
genealogy recognised the surviving Danggalaba members as the rightful claimants to
the Darwin and Cox Peninsular areas. On the genealogy, Topsy Secretary defined those
members. However, she did not define the boundary that existed between Danggalaba
38
Lynette Shield‘s uncle, Richard Shields, was involved in the Larrakia land rights campaign in 1971 (see
Day 1994). 39
According to a 1996 Supreme Court trial transcript, Helen Secretary had six children to a non-
Aboriginal man, Darren Nelson. In 2009 Michelle signed the Gwelo caveat over Kulaluk land as
‗Michelle Nelson‘, secretary of GDA. 40
Pers. Comm. Tibby Quall.
32
country and the other (though inter-related) Larrakia, apart to say that Tommy Lyons
‗looks after‘ the Cox Peninsula.
Just as a member of the Campbell clan is a Campbell and a Scot, so are members of the
Danggalaba clan Danggalaba and Larrakia. For the purpose of this report, I am not able
to further expand on the rights and interests of the wider Larrakia group of those who
Topsy Secretary recognised as Larrakia. Presumably they would have rights and
interests if a Danggalaba claim was successful, just as it has been recognised in the
Kenbi decision that the wider Larrakia language group have rights and interests.
However, I believe that the core group of those who could claim that they have not lost
connection remains the Danggalaba clan.
Mr Justice Mansfield (2006: Paras 832 and 833) commented on ‗the breakdown in the
process for the transfer of knowledge‘ amongst the wider Larrakia. Mansfield
continued: ‗I think that breakdown is also revealed in the current decision-making
structures for the Larrakia people ... I am mindful that the numerical extent of those
professing membership of (and apparently accepted as members of) the Larrakia people
is much greater than during the early and middle decades of the 20th
Century. However,
I think it is clear that the decision-making process among the Larrakia people has been
largely transferred to the Larrakia Nation. Its composition is not traditional.‘
There are marked differences between the wider Larrakia group on the 1973 genealogy
and the wider Larrakia group presented by the NLC in Kenbi and the native title claim.
The Larrakia Nation Aboriginal Corporation (LNAC) representing the wider Larrakia
claimant group is made up of representatives of eight families (Mansfield 2006: Para
695). According to Scambary (2007:157):41
This organisation [the Larrakia Nation] is a coalition, initially facilitated by the
NLC, of Larrakia families, individuals and factions, with the primary purpose of
providing a corporate identity for Larrakia against increased pressure from external
agencies to ‗know‘ whom the Larrakia were.
41
See footnote 29.
33
The LNAC structure is as a result of the land claim process and is not traditional. The
eight families include many who are not listed on the 1973 genealogy, while excluding
several notable families who are on the genealogy, and also excludes the Thompsons.
The remarks above by Mr Justice Mansfield (2006: Para 833) concerning the ‗numerical
extent of those professing membership‘ highlight how the land claim process itself has
distorted Larrakia processes of succession by accepting people who were not recognised
as Larrakia in the 1970s. As the numbers of Larrakia grew, the inclusion of additional
families would be likely to create dissention so that it is not surprising that members of
the Danggalaba clan have withdrawn to their own small groups, including the Secretary
family at Kulaluk, as identified in the Gwalwa Daraniki Association Incorporated
constitution (Appendix. 3). Other groups who identify as Larrakia/Danggalaba are the
Singhs at Belyuen (Appendix 2), the Thompsons at Bagot (see Goodfellow 2007) and
the Batcho family in Darwin (see Graham 1997).
The 1973 genealogy suggests that there exists a distinct family group which elsewhere
described itself as the Danggalaba Clan (Brandl et al 1979; Graham 1997; Appendix 2
and 3). Since 1973 those family members who are descendants from the Kenbi
Danggalaba clan genealogy have continued to identify as Danggalaba (Appendix 2 and
3), although in the second Kenbi Land Claim they identified as belonging either to a
separate ‗Tommy Lyons Group‘ or as ‗Larrakia‘. However, this report suggests that the
Singh, Secretary, Batcho, Minyinma and Thompson families also remained
‗Danggalaba‘.
As stated previously, many people not identified as Larrakia on the 1973 genealogy (see
Day 2009) gave evidence to Mr Justice Mansfield (2006) and Mr Justice Gray (2000).
Mansfield commented that ‗the present laws and customs of the Larrakia people reflect
a sincere and intense desire to re-establish those traditional laws and customs adapted to
the modern context ... That, however, is not a sufficient factual foundation for making a
determination of native title rights and interests in this proceeding‘ (Mansfield 2006:
Para 15). However, it was my observation that the Larrakia people listed on the 1973
genealogy did not feel the need to ‗re-establish‘ traditional laws and customs because by
a process of succession, they considered themselves to be holders of those laws and
customs and were recognised by others as such.
34
I suggest that the process of succession laid out in the 1973 genealogy by cognative
descent was interrupted by the longest running land claim in Australia - from 1979 to
2006, if the native title claim is included. The effects on Aboriginal society from land
claims are discussed by Reeves (1998). As a result of strategies by the NLC the
Larrakia land claims shifted from a patrilineal clan to a wider language group, then as
the claims progressed, into separate groups – ‗the Tommy Lyons group‘ the Danggalaba
group, the Larrakia group and the Belyuen group.
Once the wider group was established, in my opinion it could have become difficult for
the Danggalaba group, as shown in the 1973 genealogy, to assert their perceived rights,
particularly in a decision-making process that was foreign to them.42
The atmosphere in
the wider Darwin community could also have been intimidating. Scambary (2007:157)
writes:
...a public backlash occurred, fuelled by political comment from the Darwin Lord
Mayor, Chief Minister Stone,43
and Prime Minister Howard44
—the latter describing
the claim as ‗an extravagant ambit claim‘ (Carey and Collinge 1997: 21). The NLC
received a significant amount of mostly anonymous hate mail, including a
newspaper photograph of Larrakia claimants at a press conference that had been
modified by the drawing of targets with bullet holes on their foreheads (Wells 2003).
Scambary (2007:156) also mentions an earlier claim45
whereby, ‗The announcement of
this claim had a divisive impact on the already fragile Larrakia polity and prompted a
considerable public backlash...‘ For the above reasons I suggest that the ‗Tommy Lyons
group‘ chose to be represented separately, while others in the Batcho group and the
Secretarys at Kulaluk were persuaded to join the Larrakia group. However, evidence in
this report suggests the basic structure of the Danggalaba clan shown on the 1973
genealogy remained and remains to the present.
In paragraph 814, Mr Justice Mansfield states: ‗However, thereafter there is
progressively little evidence of the continued practice of, and respect for, the Larrakia
traditional laws and customs [up] until the 1970s.‘ I suggest that in the 1970s the
42
Andrew Thompson relates how he attended a meeting to discuss the claim but walked out because ‗they
didn‘t know what they were talking about‘ (Pers. comm.). 43
NT News, December 2, 1996 ‗land claim ‗greedy money grab‘: Stone‘; NT News, December 9, 1996,
p.5, ‗‖You‘ll pay to use the beach‖: Stone.‘ 44
NT News, December 3, 1996, ‗PM slams ambit claims.‘ 45
NT News, June 6, 1994, ‗CLP ―no part‖ in city claim.‘
35
Larrakia people with a recognised system of succession were practising laws and
customs in conjunction with the Wadjigiyn-Kiyuk people on the Cox Peninsula (Brandl
et al 1979) and other groups to the east (see Graham 1997). They may have been
adapted customs but they were considered to be uniquely Larrakia laws and customs.
The land claims process in ways suggested above has then distorted the nature of the
‗society‘ by rapidly adding many people who had not previously identified as Larrakia
and interfered with the order of succession outlined in the 1973 genealogy, not
submitted in land claim hearings prior to 2010.
Conclusion
A clan by definition cannot exist in three or more manifestations under the same name. I
suggest that these apparent separations did not exist in Larrakia society in 1973 and
were exacerbated by the land claims process from 1979 to 2006, as outlined above, and
as noted by John Reeves in his ‗Report to ATSIC‘ (1998:166). The 1973 genealogy
suggests that apparent separate groups belong to one and the same Danggalaba Clan
who, in the words of Raelene Singh, are ‗Larrakia Traditional Owner(s) and authority
for Larrakia Country here in Darwin.‘
The 1973 genealogy was drawn by Topsy Secretary before land rights became a reality
and while Dolly Gurinyi and other Larrakia elders were still alive. The genealogy was
not used in previous Larrakia land claim cases and the native title claim to land in
Darwin. The significant points of the rediscovered 1973 genealogy are:
a) the genealogy supports the claims of the Batcho family that there were mistakes
in the genealogies prepared by the Northern Land Council (NLC);
b) the genealogy is evidence that cognative descent was a recognised principle of
descent;
c) the genealogy confirms the membership of the Danggalaba clan;
d) the genealogy shows the names of those who Topsy Secretary identified as
Larrakia before the so called revival of the Larrakia people in the late 1970s and
1980s.
By switching to a language group model, the NLC introduced families who, it could be
said, had lost connection or were not identified by the 1973 genealogy as Larrakia. The
continued emphasis on patrilineal descent also marginalised the Batcho family in a
36
manner that would have been unlikely if Dolly Gurinyi had survived. The effect was to
divide the Danggalaba clan; however, the clan continued to exist and hold rights and
interests in land as has been consistently asserted by Mr Tibby Quall and claimants over
many years (Graham 1997). However, Mr Quall was lacking the one piece in the puzzle
that could have supported support his claim. The genealogy is that missing piece that
causes the whole to fit into place.
William B Day 7 November 2010
37
References
Avery, J 1997 Consultant Anthropologist’s Report to the Aboriginal Land
Commissioner. Darwin: Aboriginal Land Commission.
Blowes, R 1992 Northern Land Council & Others v Olney J, The Aboriginal Land
Commissioner & the Attorney General for the Northern Territory. Full Court of
the Federal Court of Australia, Darwin; Northrop Hill and O'Loughlin JJ, 27
February 1992; (1992) 105 ALR 539. Aboriginal Law Bulletin, Vol 2 no. 58,
pp.14-15
Brandl, M, A Haritos and M Walsh 1979 Kenbi land claim to vacant Crown land in the
Cox Peninsula, Bynoe Harbour and Port Patterson areas of the Northern
Territory of Australia. Darwin: Northern Land Council.
Brandl, M and M Walsh 1983 Roots and branches, or the far-flung net of Aboriginal
relationships. In Aborigines, land and land rights. N Peterson and M Langton,
eds. Pp.149-159. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.
Buchanan, Cheryl 1974 We have bugger all: the Kulaluk Story. Melbourne: Australian
Union of Students.
Carey, C. and Collinge, A. 1997. ‗Larrakia native title: the long march‘, Indigenous Law
Bulletin, 4 (2): 21.
Constantine, Greg 2008 ‗No middle ground for Middle Arm Development.‘, NT News,
June 5, 2008, p. 4.
Day, William Bartlett (ed) 1993 The complete 64 editions of Bunji, newsletter of the
Gwalwa Daraniki Movement, 1971-1983. Photocopied bound volume
Day, B 1994 Bunji: a story of the Gwalwa Daraniki Movement. Canberra: Aboriginal
Studies Press.
Day, W B 1996 Stand strong together: Fighting for Land Rights in Darwin.
Videorecording.
Day, William Bartlett 2001 Fringe Dwellers in Darwin: Cultural persistence or a
culture of resistance? PhD Thesis, Department of Anthropology, The University
of Western Australia.
Day, W B 2002 Law time at Youngaleena. Videorecording.
Day, W B 2003 Law time at Cane River. Videorecording.
Day, W B 2004a Law time at Wakathuni. Videorecording.
Day, W B 2004b Report on an Ethnographic Survey at Possible Burial Site P02175,
Yandi Village Walk Trail and Billiards Drilling Project at Weeli Wolli Creek,
Yandicoogina. Prepared for Gumala Aboriginal Corporation and Hamersley Iron
Pty Ltd.
Day, W B 2004c Report on an Ethnographic Survey at Possible Burial Site P02175,
Yandi Village Walk Trail and Billiards Drilling Project at Weeli Wolli Creek,
Yandicoogina. Prepared for Gumala Aboriginal Corporation and Hamersley Iron
Pty Ltd.
Day, W B 2004d Report of an Ethnographic Heritage Survey for Weeli Wolli Water
Monitoring Bores, Quail Siding and Junction South East Extensions to Pilbara
Iron’s Yandi Mine, Yandicoogina, Pilbara, Western Australia. Prepared for
Gumala Aboriginal Corporation and Hamersley Iron Pty Ltd.
Day, W B 2005 Law time at Mulga Downs. Videorecording.
Day, B 2007a Report of an Ethnographic Survey of Northern and Southern Areas of
Pilbara Iron’s Billiards Prospect, either side of Weeli Wolli Creek,
Yandicoogina, Pilbara, Western Australia. For Gumala Aboriginal Corporation
and Pilbara Iron Pty Ltd.
38
Day, B 2007b Preliminary Advice of an Ethnographic Survey of the Proposed Hope
Downs 4 and Hope Downs 6 Geo-technical Drilling Program Project Area
within E47/00429 and E47/00430, East Pilbara, Western Australia. Prepared for
the Martu Idja Nyiyaparli Aboriginal Corporation and Pilbara Iron Pty Ltd.
Day, B 2008a Report of an Ethnographic Survey for a Bankable Feasibility Study at
Hope Downs 4 (East Angelas) Tenement E47/00429, Pilbara, Western
Australia. For Karlka Nyiyaparli Aboriginal Corporation and Hope Downs Iron
Ore and Rio Tinto Iron Ore.
Day, B 2008b Report of an Ethnographic Survey in relation to the Bakers North
Exploration and Evaluation Drilling Program, Tenements E47/00623 and
E47/01313, Pilbara, Western Australia. Prepared for Karlka Nyiyaparli
Aboriginal Corporation and Hope Downs Iron Ore (HDIO) and Rio Tinto Iron
Ore (RTIO).
Day, B 2008c Preliminary Advice on an Ethnographic Survey for Aboriginal Sites at
Priority 1 & 2 Areas, Cloud Break to Christmas Creek Rail & Access Corridors,
Gnarloo Pit Block Areas and Associated Infrastructure, Borrow Pit and
Temporary and Permanent Camps: Chichester Ranges, Pilbara, Western
Australia. Prepared for the Karlka Nyiyaparli Aboriginal Corporation and
Fortescue Metals Group (FMG).
Day, B. 2008d Addendum to a Report on an Ethnographic Survey for Aboriginal Sites
Priority 1–3 Areas — Cloud Break to Christmas Creek Rail & Access Road
Corridors, General Block Area & Christmas Creek Initial Mining Request Area &
Consultation Regarding Archaeological Sites, Priority 2 Area: Chichester Ranges,
Pilbara, Western Australia. Prepared for the Karlka Nyiyaparli Aboriginal
Corporation and Fortescue Metals Group (FMG).
Day, W B 2008e Report of an Ethnographic Consultation with Karlka Nyiyaparli
Aboriginal Corporation in relation to Iron Ore Holdings’ proposed RC Drilling
Program, Access Tracks and Temporary Camp near Weeli Wolli Creek on
Tenement E47/1385, Pilbara, Western Australia. Prepared on behalf of
Ethnosciences for Iron Ore Holdings and Karlka Nyiyaparli Aboriginal
Corporation.
Day, W B 2008f Report of an Ethnographic Survey for the Proposed Hancock
Prospecting Exploration Drilling Program at East Angelas, Round Hill and
Coondina Tenements and the Proposed Mining Operation at M46/81, M46/121
and M46/80 Balfour Downs, Pilbara, Western Australia. Prepared for the
Nyiyaparli Native Title Claimants and Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd.
Day, W B 2008g Report on Ethnographic Consultation with the Karlka Nyiyaparli
Association in relation to BHP Billiton Iron Ore’s proposed Ore Body 18 Waste
Dump, Access Track Upgrade, Jimblebar Rock Shelter and Exploration Drilling
Programs at Mesa Gap & Ninga, Pilbara, Western Australia. Prepared on
behalf of Ethnosciences for the Karlka Nyiyaparli Aboriginal Corporation and
BHP Billiton Iron Ore.
Day, W B 2009 Larrakia Dreaming: the man named after a butcher shop: Richard
Koolpinyah Barnes. Unpublished essay.
Day, W B 2010 Kulaluk and land rights. Unpublished essay.
Day, W B and T Farnham 2010 Report of an Ethnographic Consultation with Karlka
Nyiyaparli Aboriginal Corporation in relation to Iron Ore Holdings’ proposed
Drilling Program at Iron Valley near Weeli Wolli Creek on Tenement E47/1385,
Pilbara, Western Australia. Prepared for Iron Ore Holdings and Karlka
Nyiyaparli Aboriginal Corporation
French, Finn and Sundberg 2007 Risk v Northern Territory of Australia [2007] fcafc 46
Federal Court of Australia
39
Goodfellow, D L 2007 Quiet snake Dreaming. Palmerston, NT: Scrubfowl Press.
Graham, R 1997 Kenbi (Cox Peninsula) Land Claim: Submission on behalf of some
members of the Danggalaba. Darwin: Northern Land Council.
Gray, P R A 2000 The Kenbi (Cox Peninsula) Land claim No. 37: Report and
recommendations by the Aboriginal Land Commissioner, Justice Gray, to the
Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs and to the
Administrator of the Northern Territory. Canberra: Australian Government
Publishing Service.
Heffernam, S 1997 ‗You got a put a true story‘ - reflections upon Land and Identity by
Larrikya elder Topsy Secretary. In Australian Identities, David Day (ed), pp.
163-174. Heffernan, S 1996 ‘You got a put true story’: reflections upon land, identity and upon
the relationship between the Larrikiya and Barragut as seen through the life
story of Larrikiya elder Topsy Secretary. Paper presented to the ‗Australian
identities, history, environment, culture‘ conference, University College Dublin,
July 1996.
Heffernan, S and T Secretary 1994 Gweylgwa ngayuboenoe gwoyalwa nganigi: ‘I
burnt my feet for this country, this is my country’. Unpublished biography of
Topsy Secretary.
Henderson, K 1984 History of the Kulaluk Lease. Aboriginal Sacred Sites Authority.
Kearney, W J 1984 Nicholson River (Waanyi/Garawa) Land Claim. Report by the
Aboriginal Land Commissioner Justice Kearney, to the Minister for Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander Affairs and to the Administrator of the Northern
Territory. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
Kearney, W J 1988 Jawoyn (Katherine area) land claim: report by the Aboriginal Land
Commissioner Justice Kearney, to the Minister for Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Affairs and to the Administrator of the Northern Territory. Canberra:
Australian Government Publishing Service.
Lockwood, Douglas 1968 The Front Door: Darwin 1869-1969. Adelaide: Rigby.
McConvell, P 1989 Kapuk ceremony for Nipper Rankin, 6 May 1989. Videorecording.
Mansfield, 2006 Risk v Northern Territory of Australia, [2006] FCA 404. William
Risk, Helen Secretary & Pauline Baban on behalf of the Larrakia people and
Kevin Lance Quall on behalf of the Danggalaba & Kulumbiringin people v
Northern Territory of Australia and Darwin City Council and Amateur
Fishermen‘s Association of the Northern Territory & Others [2006] fca 404
Federal Court of Australia Corrigendum.
Olney, H W 1991 Kenbi (Cox Peninsula) land claim: findings and report of the
Aboriginal Land Commissioner. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing
Service.
Povinelli, E A 1993 Labor’s Lot: the power, history and culture of Aboriginal Action.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Wells, S 2001 Saltwater People: Larrakia stories from around Darwin. Darwin:
Larrakia Nation Aboriginal Corporation.
Reeves, J 1998 Building on Land Rights for the Next Generation. Pp. 153-175.
Canberra: ATSIC.
Scambary, B 2007 ‗No vacancies at the Starlight Motel‘: Larrakia identity and the
native title claim process. In B Smith and F Morphy, eds, CAEPR Research
Monographs, No. 27, The Social Effects of Native Title Recognition,
Translation, Coexistence. Pp. 151-165. Canberra: Australian National
University. Sutton, Peter 1998 ‗Top End: the Larrakia‘. In P Sutton, Native Title and the Descent of
Rights. Pp. 103-113. Perth, WA: National Native Title Tribunal.
40
Tennant, L 1983 ‗Women and land rights: Kiuk and Wagaidj women in the Darwin
area.‘ In F Gale, We are bosses ourselves: the status and role of Aboriginal
women today. Pp. 84-85. Canberra: AIAS.
Toohey, J 1978 Claim by the Warlpiri and Kartangarurru-Kurrintji. Report by the
Aboriginal Land Commissioner. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing
Service.
Toohey, J 1981 Finniss River land claim: Report by the Aboriginal Land
Commissioner. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
Toohey, J 1982 Daly River (Malak Malak) land claim. Report by the Aboriginal Land
Commissioner. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
Walsh, M 1981 Report on sites of significance in the Larrakeyah Barracks – Emery
Point area, Darwin. Darwin: Aboriginal Sacred Sites Protection Authority.
Walsh, M 1989a Ten years on: a supplement to the 1979 Kenbi land claim book.
Darwin: Northern Land Council.
Walsh, M 1989b Supplement to Ten years on. Darwin: Northern Land Council.
Walsh, M 1996 Tainted evidence: literacy and traditional knowledge in an Aboriginal
land claim. In D Eades, ed. Language in evidence: issues confronting Aboriginal
and multicultural Australia. Pp. 97-124. Sydney: University of New South
Wales Press.
Ward, R 1975a Kulaluk land claim: findings and report of the Interim Aboriginal Land
Commissioner. Darwin: Interim Aboriginal Land Commission.
Ward, R 1975b Goondal land claim: findings and report of the Interim Aboriginal
Land Rights Commissioner. Darwin: Interim Aboriginal Land Commission.
Woodward, A E 1973 First Report of the Aboriginal Land Rights Commissioner.
Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
Woodward, A E 1974 Final Report of the Aboriginal Land Rights Commissioner.
Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.
41
Appendix 1: Letter to Bill Day from National Archives of Australia, June 23, 2004.
42
Appendix 2: Letter from Raylene Singh, ‘Traditional Owner and Chairperson’,
Kenbi Danggalaba Association, to President, Wagait Shire Council. 31 August
2009.
43
44
Appendix 3: Pages from the Constitution of the Gwalwa Daraniki Association Inc.
45
46
47
Appendix 4: The 1973 Topsy Secretary genealogy (‘Gwalwa Daraniki, Series of
correspondence’, Series Number A4252, control symbol 33, National Archives of
Australia, Canberra. Pp. 73-78).
48
49
50
51
52
Appendix 5: The Danggalaba clan (Walsh 1981)
Recommended